Change Your Image
mpless
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
The Head (2020)
So Poorly Written It Gives Me Chills
I had high hopes for this because it's a genre that I enjoy. Sadly, almost from the outset it proved to be a disappointment that only got worse with time. I decided to compile a list of plot holes and implausibilities for the show, from memory. I stopped at 42.
I researched via Google a few things that just didn't make sense, and sure enough, I was right in my beliefs. Perhaps if the writers had access to a decent search engine or even had the professionalism and care to use one, the show would have been markedly different. It is obvious that they had never been to the Arctic, let alone the Antarctic, nor had any knowledge of what it would take to be part of a research establishment - from the people to the environment to the structures to the equipment - and decided to just go ahead anyway.
The script is rife with extraordinary flaws, not the least of which is the "military grade encryption" that can be bypassed within a minute by an inspired youth. Don't start me on some of the groan-worthy issues like: the flammability of fuel; behaviour of steam; the utter lack of rational thought by people whom I presume would be thoroughly vetted for intellect by the research authorities. Nor even the fact that after returning to your research base following a winter in less chilly climes and finding a terrified woman with a knife, hiding in a kitchen cupboard, there is no incentive to ask her who she was hiding from. I could go on with issues that prevented me suspending my disbelief at all, let alone as much as I would have liked to.
This is a profoundly shoddy effort by writers who were patently disinterested in their craft. Some people have defended this by declaring it to be perfect. Hardly.
Metropolis (2015)
A superficial scratch of city surfaces
The insularity of the producers shines brightly in this cursory look at half a dozen "important" cities in the world - half of which are American, like the producers, the historians, and the other interviewees of minor celebrity.
I'm certain there a local historians for London, Paris, and Rome who could provide far better insights than the Americans who chose to opine on these wonderful places. But that might not have been satisfactory for the intended audience.
It could have been far better, far more informative, because the CGI going backwards in time was quite illuminating. Instead, I got the feeling that the non-US cities were regarded as quaint, novel, and not nearly so desirable locations as the "home-grown" ones
Wonder Woman (2017)
The best collection of limited-range actors - EVER!
I rate the title so highly because of some of the special effects which were truly adequate. The rest of the movie deserves oblivion.
Chris Pine, Gal Gadot, Connie Nielsen, and Robin Wright all have such poor acting skills that their performances were standard and unmoving expressions throughout the film. I half expected Pine to flip open a communicator and call out "Spock?" and Wright to address him as "Frank." Others have already pointed out astonishing continuity errors in the movie, but for me the worst was Pine's entrance when a German warship enters the "bubble" that hides the Amazon's home from view. Some boats with soldiers (not sailors) are launched and the soldiers get wiped-out eventually shown with interminable slow-mo "action" scenes. Next scene, the warship is gone. No mention of it, and it would seem there's no radio communication from the captain back to base because it is never seen again, nor is there any investigation into this mysterious island that is on nobody's charts. Never mind that dozens of highly-trained archers couldn't wipe out most of the soldiers before they got within 50 metres of shore because few marksmen could aim faithfully on a badly wallowing boat in choppy seas. And when the soldiers do reach shore, it appears the archers promptly pack up and go home but for a few who remain around to be picked-off at will.
There are of course, the mandatory sexist comments against Diana by the older men but none seems to have strong enough views to enforce them. And although her skimpy costume (by the day's standards) shocks Pine's secretary, not one other member of the population of London or France, or Germany sees fit to comment.
On the topic of costumes, the Amazons all seem to have selected their garments from a 14-years-old boy's fantasies and this appears to be pretty much their sole wardrobe. Other credibility issues revolve around the artfully sculpted eyebrows and hair, perfectly waxed bodies and the lipstick that most of the island's residents wear. But then WW is no worse than most post-apocalypse sc-fi movies in this regard.
There are far too many slo-mo sequences in the movie and these quickly contributed to the boredom already founded by the wooden acting and shoddy script. Since when did Wonder Woman gain the ability to fly, too? When I last read the comic books she certainly couldn't because she had an invisible plane to get around in. Yet, superman-like in the final scene she launches herself into the air and soars towards the horizon.
Like so much that is produced nowadays the film is big on explosive spectacle and special effects; short on good (never mind great) acting, a formulaic script, and a plot that's calculated to be simple enough for the lowest common denominator to understand.
Sure it made money, but the obligatory sequel will not see any of my hard-earned spent on it.
Une chance de trop (2015)
Thankfully more forgettable than his novels
If ever a series failed to live up to its title, this is certainly it: Far from there being "No Second Chance" there are extra chances aplenty, for the central character to either redeem herself or rescue her daughter.
I cannot forget the sole example of Coben's work I have read - an appalling novel about some golfer-agent. Years after the reading, it still stays with me for its amateurish, poorly-written prose and dialogue. It simply reads like an early-teen's first draft. Many like his work though and that in itself is a great mystery.
There is too little credibility for any of the characters to possibly suspend disbelief. Alice Lambert is shot and nearly dies (her husband is not so fortunate), and her baby kidnapped. The police seem determined to blame her, despite no explanation as to why the baby is kidnapped, nor how Alice accomplished this whilst unconscious and bleeding to death. Not until episode 4 of 6 do the bumbling, accusatory, superficial, and plain stupid police ask this and other fundamental questions. Alice's lawyer Louis is loyal beyond all reason, openly risking his practice by aiding Alice to break the law and when she is a fugitive, helping her escape. There are many more plot holes and inconsistencies if a viewer cares enough to look.
By the end of episode 4, the future seems to be panning-out clearly as a badly clichéd series of circumstances and premises that have been roundly done to death years ago. Nothing new to see here, folks, so move along!
In the tradition of US pulp TV dramas, when Alice recalls something she gazes trance-like into the camera and the memories then roll. That way the audience has a marker to indicate that it is a recollection and not commence howling at the screen that the "baby is saved" or similar. Sadly her acting range is so finite that this is barely different to her routine expression. The remainder of the cast (particularly Pascal Elbe, who seems to trying to impersonate Jeffrey Dean Morgan with no discernible success) are similarly unconvincing. Add-in subtitles that appear to have been done by someone who does not speak English, and the result is an unappealing mess, the end of which cannot arrive soon enough.
Others have opined that the French often do some pretty good work and I tend to agree. This is not one of them and deserves to be ignored, then forgotten.
Crossing Lines (2013)
Rapidly becoming unwatchable
After a promising first two seasons, it appears the writers and director are either losing interest or are now targeting audiences that are comatose.
The dialogue is becoming both predictable and littered with expository statements, and the plot lines are now obvious. There are occasional bursts of unresolved sexual tension between the team members, which is all too American in its structure. So too, the mainstay of most police dramas in the US - lots of gun battles with criminals - is becoming more prevalent.
Then there's the pseudo-science that plot resolution often hinges on, and the dreadful lack of attention to detail: "...wiped down the revolver..." says one of the cast, and yet there's a photo of a pistol clearly displayed. This is just a single example.
Time I think, for all concerned to pack up and move onto other projects.
Zoo (2015)
Unbelievable on so many levels
I've said it in the past, and I'll say it again: any work of fiction requires a suspension of disbelief on the part of the reader/viewer. In this show, the script-writing is so abominably poor (and at times, even the actors seemingly can't believe what they're being asked to say) that I must shake my head in wonder at how Applebaum and co could look at their work and say to themselves, "There. I couldn't have done better." I know a nine-year-old who could have done better! There are numerous plot holes like others have observed, and it seems that instantaneous travel is a reality in the show's universe.
I can't let pass the Antarctica farce: it appears there are two female scientists who are studying seagulls - why is never revealed, but the birds look like seagulls and the viewer is never enlightened further - and it doesn't appear to be winter, so the ambient temperature is somewhere between 5 and 15 degrees Celsius. Hardly the worst that Antarctica can offer. No matter, bats (that have flown from... somewhere) cover the solar cells depriving the research labs of electricity, almost instantly. It appears there are no batteries (how they'd survive in winter is a mystery never solved), nor any reliable form of backup power, because this fails shortly after and presumably prior to the scientists issuing a distress call and a request for an electrician: a bat managed to hitchhike inside and promptly suicided by flying into the lab's sole, tiny, electric room heater causing a short. "Oh well, there goes the backup power," says one of the researchers. It seems both were terrified of the "icky" yet tiny creature. A short while later, there is ice on the walls inside, and the two researchers - who only saw fit to cover themselves with blankets partially(!) are seemingly frozen solid, perhaps because they don't know how to reset the circuit-breaker, nor find the winter clothing.
No. No. NO! This is so stupid as to beggar belief, and also seems to cast females as stereotypically helpless in the face of any technical malfunction.
There are more instances of stupid, superficial writing (like a hard drive that can be cloned wirelessly, in less than 30 seconds) - several in each episode, in fact. My wife likes the show and insists we watch it together, but I squirm my way through each tedious, boring, 40 or so minutes, hopeful hoping what remains of my intellect isn't being pounded into submission. Thankfully there are only a total of 13, but it seems a second season is promised.
*Please cancel it immediately.*
The one reason I didn't give a lower score is because the budget for the show is seemingly quite high, although I feel the prison scenes re-used the sets from the show Oz. Maybe they did, maybe not, but it's the overall lack of quality writing that keeps the score low.
Terminator Genisys (2015)
Thank Goodness! No Sequel announced...yet.
A bugbear of mine is clumsy expository dialogue and there's lots of it in this pointless, irrelevant, and ultimately valueless continuation of the "series." Then there's the seemingly obligatory "I'll be back" line that AS delivers in each of the films. It's both tired and unnecessary.
Arnie is at his best though, as a robot attempting to act somewhat human.
I didn't have too much trouble following the plot line, such as it was. Accepting it as a creditable continuation of the story was beyond me though. The gaping plot hole from T2 Judgement Day is still there: only items enclosed in living tissue can travel through time. And yet the T200 - which is all robot - and can mimic human and other appearances despite being a "poly-alloy" has no problem with the time machine part of things.
Partway through, I began wondering if, when Jason Clarke declares there aren't enough bullets in the world to kill him, that perhaps this might be some allegorical tale about terrorism. Then he stood while lead characters emptied their magazines and needless to say, Clark/Connor didn't die. (Is there a single US "action" movie that doesn't feature a multitude of automatic weapons?) Clarke is normally a capable actor, and I think he gives a good performance in this, mostly, I think because he keeps a straight face whilst delivering lines a James Bond megalomaniac wouldn't utter.
But then I gave up trying to find a justification for this movie, and waited it out, for the end had to be nigh and my suffering would then be over.
Courtney, Emilia Clarke (no relation to Jason), Simmons, and Holt (together with other minor characters) all do their best with what they're given, but the script fails, and checking the writers, it seems they have a history of sub-standard work.
No surprise then that their form continues.
Whether the Terminator series ends with this film or not, I don't have an opinion one way or the other, but if there must be more, I hope there is more care laved on the script, so the actors can make an attempt at good performances, and the audience can at least feel they got some value from watching it.
The Bletchley Circle (2012)
Exceptional in every way
Many things come together to make a show good, and more are needed to make it great. But to elevate a show to near-perfection requires far more than just great scripts, direction, settings, and acting, all of which TBC possesses in abundance. It needs attention to the smallest details, some of which are painfully, and obviously absent from many shows across the Atlantic.
Obvious details like selecting actors who actually look like offspring of a parent are often ignored in many US shows. The period sets look realistic enough to make me nostalgic for the land of my birth. Careful watching of shows like Mad Men, sees props that have had a hard life when they're supposed to be new, harming the overall effect of an historical setting.
On the topic of Mad Men, the gentleness of the sexism in TBC is a welcome subtlety, unlike the former show, where it is not just blatant, but at times brutal.
Also absent (thankfully) is the mix of races that - along with sexual orientation - is increasingly common (if not mandatory) in many US shows. So too is the boyfriend/lover that provides little or no value to a script. There are four central characters, each with their own lives, and in some cases, husbands, but the males are of only superficial value to the scripts and have accordingly minor roles, only providing opportunities for the leads to develop their roles.
The actors also bring to life the characters with superb conviction and credibility; the pace is just right, and so too is the idea of them taking a bus to get to a location. Not many had cars, early post-war.
When expressed, emotions are conveyed with realism, and in sufficient quantity to move the viewer. At no stage have I felt like I was watching actors, it was more like being given a glimpse into the lives of real people. Again, this is something only the best of teams can achieve.
This is a wonderful show and might well be a treatise on how to create entertainment that is endearing and bound to be enduring. Writers, directors, producers, and actors should all take note.
CSI: Crime Scene Investigation (2000)
Once great, now it grates
Wonderfully stylish and engagingly shot, this series was one of the first (but certainly *not* the first) to make forensic science interesting and understandable to those who aren't in the trade. The animations and so forth used to further explain complex principles are as strong and engaging as ever.
Even the gradual turn-over of characters hasn't hurt the series so much, because the characters are as wonderful as the production values. From Peterson's abstract and at times eccentric Gil Grissom, through Lawrence Fishburn's brooding (if not threatening, at times) Ray Langston, to the strict, but wise father-figure of Ted Danson, they are unique and bring something to scripts that are increasingly shoddy and seemingly churned-out *sans* any care whatsoever.
It is the expository dialogue that so annoys, for it often treats the viewer as if they were incapable of putting two and two together. The latest example is when Danson's daughter is kidnapped and she leaves a trail of forensic breadcrumbs that end at tyre tracks and paint flakes. "I think she's trying' to tell us they switched cars," says the now overweight George Eads. Really? That needed to be spelled-out so bluntly, because the audience wouldn't realize what it meant? I certainly hope CSI is not now targeting coma patients! The exposition is also increasingly poorly-crafted, and I know from experience that forensic scientists don't talk like that amongst each other. I accept that some things need to be explained to the audience. That said, it is totally unnecessary for the characters to deliver a lecture as if to primary-school children on what they are about to do, giving detail on the physics or chemistry, only to have their equally-knowledgeable colleague comment, "That's amazing/terrific/wonderful/etc."
There are now what looks like hundreds (if not scores) of writers for the show, and perhaps this is the cause of the poorly-crafted dialogue - they simply lack a clear understanding of how a forensic science lab might operate and find the science new and exciting and in their gushing enthusiasm presume the audience is similarly...clueless.
The Following (2013)
Out of control, but sadly not out of favour.
Towards the end of Season 2, the situation is becoming truly muddled and farcical: Ryan Hardy (Kevin Bacon) obviously does not play well with others and manages to kill someone in nearly every episode, so his body count exceeds that of James Purefoy (Joe Carroll). The FBI and/or SWAT and/or police are increasingly portrayed as inept and uncoordinated. The realization that mayhem is occurring across town doesn't see anyone getting on the phone or radio but rather they all bundle into a car and fight their way through traffic.
Worse, the script is written for the brain-dead. For example, one characters says the photo of a vehicle had its registration plates taped-over. So they know how to avoid the cameras, says his colleague. Really? If they knew how to avoid the cameras how did anyone get a photo of the car to begin with? Plot developments that seem quite obvious to any living viewer always get excessive supporting expository dialogue. Furthermore, even being shot doesn't seem to slow any character at all, and in any event, the wound heals near-instantly and completely.
Meanwhile Purefoy seems unbelievably charismatic as he incites the feeble-minded to do his increasingly irrational will, with little valid motivation other than to give Hardy someone to pursue and of course, wonder about. Meanwhile, minions left, right, and centre display uncommon abilities to avoid capture by myriad police/FBI/SWAT.
It's all too confusing, simplistic, unrealistic, and unappetizing. In writing I was taught how important it was to suspend disbelief, but here, the multitude of writers (perhaps this is a major cause of the problems - too many cooks and no chefs) seem to have hoist disbelief up on the nearest gibbet, leaving it to dangle and die horribly.
That there will be a season 3 is a sign that I'll be watching reruns of... well, just about anything.
Modern Family (2009)
So good, I can forgive its worst flaw
Very few US sitcoms can leave that country and find a home abroad. Frasier was one that springs to mind and Big Bang Theory is another. The rest... don't work that well, because of differing cultural perceptions of what constitutes "funny."
Well, add Modern Family to that list, a show about the siblings of Jay (the terrific and badly underrated Ed O'Neil), his new wife and her son, and Jake's children and grandchildren. It is at times exquisite, warm, downright hilarious, captivating, incisive, and always interesting. The writers have done a superb job of character creation, and it says much that my friends and I each have a favorite character. The balance is terrific, and everyone gets valuable lines. Ty Burrell as Phil Dunphy is unrelentingly a standout, in my opinion.
Though heart-warming at times, the script never becomes soppy or lecturing. The usual staple of setup-punchline of lesser sitcoms (Two Broke Girls for example, where it is relentless and tiring) rarely occurs, or when it does, often it's subtle, and thankfully avoids the overtly sexual one-liners of the execrable Two and a Half Men.
Quite simply Modern family is all class and deserves every accolade it receives.
But there's more than just excellent writing to the show - the performances are credible and often the delivery of lines is perfectly-timed. Even the weakest cast member (Aubry Aderson-Emmons) is now getting useful lines though she can't act at all. Furthermore, the cast isn't mired in their own, unchanging universe. They are developing, changing with time - which happens as people go through life. This ensures the show remains fresh and eminently watchable.
And its greatest flaw? Like many US sitcoms that features parents and offspring, none of the children look like they had either "parent" contribute to their genes. And who could possibly believe the offspring of the tall and voluptuous Gloria (Sofia Vergara) and slim, athletically built Javier (Benjamin Brat) would be a short and stocky (verging on overweight) Manny (Rico Rodriguez)?
It's a bit off-putting, but as I say, the rest of the show is so good, I forgive it.
I cannot see any reason why this show shouldn't set records for longevity and scoop many awards along the way. Just keep an eye out for Ty Burrell - he can be insensitive, facetious, noble, sleazy, supportive, loving, and idiotic. Often in combination!
Sons of Anarchy (2008)
Morphing into something less
At the end of season 6, I find an increasing lack of satisfaction with the show. Many, if not all of the characters are unlikeable at best, including those of Katey Sagal, Charlie Hunnam, and Maggie Siff. In addition, the body count per season is rising significantly. So much so I start to wonder if the town of Charming can perhaps be looking somewhat deserted.
Initially, the central and ancillary characters all had their merits, but as the seasons progressed, they changed, perhaps to the ultimate detriment of the show. Earlier, there were occasional bursts of black humor and the plot twists were few but served to propel the storyline and increase both tension and interest.
Sadly, no more. It is becoming a relief to reach the closing credits for each episode because the morbid songs that often serve as a soundtrack to the ending scenes are just too depressing.
Sutter's writing remains powerful though and the actors - lead and otherwise - give sterling performances. All seem to judge their roles perfectly and give terrific performances, though Jimmy Smits is a standout. At times and in other shows I'm acutely aware that I'm watching actors at work, but not so in SoA. They all seem authentic and for this I can mark the show higher than I otherwise would, though if I was writing this after season 3, I'd mark it much higher still.
And as has become almost the norm, the season ends with an apparently impending prison term for an otherwise innocent character.
So I await season 7, but with less enthusiasm than previously. I no longer have the strength of interest in the character's fortunes, and may well move on to something else come September. That said, I'm hopeful Sutter will rediscover originality and inspiration and is able to elevate SoA to the heights it once reached.
Louie (2010)
Too vulgar and monotonous by far
I read many of the reviews and so tried to watch this. After seven episodes I can no longer continue. It is just not funny, a major failing in this genre.
I don't mind the occasional sexual joke, but for them to be the sole source of attempted humor, I just gave up. I don't think endless references to vaginas (vaginae?) are in any way clever or fresh. It isn't a word that comes up commonly in mixed conversation, so I guess Louie was trying for shock value, but this would have limited attraction to anyone not brain-dead.
In one episode Louie, in his stand up act verbally abused an audience member in a particularly coarse manner. True, this was part of the act and the show, but it was too extreme. In terms of observational humor, Jerry Seinfeld was masterful and managed it without excessive mentioning of his or anyone else's genitals. Billy Connolly did a hilarious act where he discussed his genitals, and I'd encourage the shows writers to observe and perhaps take note of how a professional works.
Quite simply, if you like your humor to be witty and intelligent, you'll have to look elsewhere.
Jack Reacher (2012)
Shot taken, shot missed
Based on the Lee Child novel One Shot, much has been said about the inappropriateness of Tom Cruise in the leading role of this movie, and I don't intend to go into detail here. But he is miscast, and badly: the role has several elements of the character from the book, and Cruise seems to miss just about every one. He can't do laconic - it comes across as smarmy; he can't do stoic either, it comes across as supercilious. And it almost goes without saying that he can't do suppressed violence as well.
(Potential spoiler following) But the biggest failing of the movie is in the opening few minutes, when it is made obvious who the assassin is. I got the feeling I was watching an episode of some trite TV detective drama from the 1970's, where the plot was given away in the opening scene so that the sole interest was whether or not the heroic investigator would solve the mystery in time to save the damsel. (There was always a damsel in these shows, and she became distressed at some stage. Always. Just like in this movie.) I marked the movie down because of this deep and insurmountable flaw, but there is some degree of "but wait, there's more" to the ways the movie fails.
The flaws go deeper still with what often happens when adapting a book for the screen - the dialog or background information that the prose supplies goes missing and the director or screenwriter fails to provide it for the audience. The Zec (the antagonist) appears very briefly and his motivations and history are covered just as fast. The same applies to Robert Duvall's character (Cash) which gets almost as much screen time as The Zec.
(Potential spoiler) On the subject of Duvall, he appears to have little interest in his role, and by the end of the movie, so too, the director, Christopher McQuarrie. At this stage Cash holds his gun over a rock, sprays bullets wildly, and somehow manages to injure an assailant a hundred meters or more away, and on the other side of a large quarry.
At this stage, I just wanted the episode/movie to end. Unlike the book, my disbelief was far from suspended - I take exception to lazy acting and directing. It treats the viewer with contempt, and I respond in kind.
Episodes (2011)
Good talent wasted
I think that when the writers of any story or script resort to extreme profanity in an effort to get laughs, that's a sign that they're inept and devoid of ideas.
Such is the case with Episodes.
When watching comedy, I don't expect situations that are exact mirrors of real life - my expectations are for some ridiculousness thrown in, and if there is a touch (or more) of farce then all the better.
Sadly, the writers (Crane and Klarik) together have little flare for comedic writing and would do well to review and deconstruct the outstanding work of Steven Moffatt (Coupling). And then perhaps admit to themselves that such skills are clearly beyond them, for Moffatt hits so many highs in his work that Crane and Klarik would suffer oxygen deprivation if they even tried to elevate their work to a fraction of Moffatt's level.
Tamsin Greig and Stephen Mangan play the "fish out of water" couple when they venture to Los Angeles to try to transplant their successful comedy series to US television. There, they find out how strange and predatory an environment they're in.
I think Matt LeBlanc and Tamsin Greig are excellent comedic talents, and with the right script - as has happened on numerous occasions in their careers. On the other hand, Stephen Mangan is a complete waste of time being permanently mono-dimensional. The slightly frayed, slightly narcissistic, slightly sleazy and always spineless persona is yesterday's news, I'm afraid.
That said, there are a few moments (literally) in the show, but these are very subtle and can be easily missed.
But in short, the times when this show amuses - and no more - are too infrequent to justify the time it takes to watch each episode.
Sherlock Holmes (2009)
Sherlock Holmes for the brain-dead
By-passing the outraged and ignorant who seem to think the only Holmes is the one played so well by Basil Rathbone many years ago, this movie nonetheless lacks a great deal of entertainment value, and treats the audience as if they were dim-wits. Having said that, I am delighted that Watson is portrayed as something other than a bumbling foil, but more of Jude Law's role later.
The quantity of expository dialog grates after the first few minutes, and the attempts to show Holmes' thinking by using voice-overs becomes tedious. There are better ways of doing this, but if you're pitching at a CSI-style audience (as a retired forensic scientist, I can assure you all that we do not lean on our instruments, and discuss the basic principles of their function with each other), then perhaps the laziness or ineptness of the script-writer(s) is understandable.
Downey appears to be reprising his role as Stark in Iron Man, but with Jude Law as his near-constant companion just to provide some modicum of variety.
The action comes quickly, and with little let-up, but this is no handicap to the enjoyment. The somewhat washed-out colors and the fact the scenes are almost always in dim locations means much of the movement is hard to discern in the gloom and surely action needs to be clearly seen? The sets themselves show obvious artifacts of cgi and after pieces like Gladiator and more recently the brilliant Avatar, the audience is left feeling either budgets prevented the job being done properly or more dangerously, that the studio didn't care, thinking the drawcards of Holmes, Downey and Law were sufficient.
Though Downey tries hard, it is Law who comes across as more convincing and is the focus of attention whenever the two are together. His portrayal is the highlight of the movie. The lowlight is, obviously, the handcuffed Downey, naked on the bed with only a teddy-bear for modesty. This is US-sit-com stuff and the fact such a tired, clichéd scene features heavily in previews shows the utter lack of imagination the scriptwriters put into their work. And of course, the giant who wreaks mayhem and is near-invincible has been done to death. Is it such a crime to bring something new to the audience?
The climax was both predictable and tedious, but thankfully has one recommendation: it showed the end was near. There are many movies where the talents of the cast are wasted. Sadly, this can so easily be added to the list, and must be done so immediately.
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)
Don't let Lucas write again. EVER! (Possible spoilers)
As soon as I saw the opening credits with George Lucas as the writer, I feared this would be an unremarkable, poorly-scripted pastiche of tired old ideas thrown together. As it stands, I was to be proved right, but I didn't know worse was to come...
...in the form of Cate Blanchett's appalling pseudo Russian accent, mixed with what appeared to be at times, Scottish, Australian, German, and goodness-knows what else. Her character was almost entirely superfluous after the opening scenes, and perhaps this is a reason she gave what must be a worst-of-career performance. Even she has been publicly critical of her attempts at an accent.
...in the guise of dreadful story-telling with Lucas' favorite clichés thrown at the audience in predictable, unimaginative ways. Thank goodness he didn't have the aliens playing pop music on strange instruments, a la Star Wars!
...in the attempts at humor which at times devolved into sheer stupidity, devoid of entertainment.
Harrison Ford finds himself in the company of what looks to be a James Dean/Marlon Brando wannabe, after escaping from psychopathic Russian spies in a totally implausible way. Presently, despite being all-but accused of subversion by his own government, Ford and his new partner are again pursued by aforementioned Russians, although followed is more appropriate.
In the company of the said Brando-ette and later, John Hurt as a somewhat demented colleague (who miraculously gains his senses after the denouement) and Karen Allen, they embark on a quest that features large waterfalls, car chases, fisticuffs aplenty, and a scene that could have been stolen from The Mummy using large and unconvincing computer-generated ants. Perhaps this is the greatest flaw in the film: an effective story requires suspension of disbelief. To enjoy this movie requires its total annihilation.
As you'd expect from a Spielberg film, the actors try hard, and at least in the action sequences, Ford acquits himself well despite his age. Karen Allen provides a degree of near-manic expression at times and John Hurt was totally wasted, for Allen's role at least served some function through the movie.
Of course, there are the obligatory ancient devices that have survived for centuries whilst remaining in perfect working order these are the stuff of many adventure movies.
That I nearly fell asleep several times says much for the lack of suspense and interest in the film.
I gave it a very low rating for this and the fact there have been several adventure movies recently that have trumped it without being exceptional most notably the National Treasure duo.
In all, there is little to commend this movie, and if this had been the first in the series, it would certainly have ensured there were no others. A sad fall for such a loved hero.
Wedding Crashers (2005)
Nothing I haven't seen before. And outgrown.
The premise ordinarily would have driven me from this movie: that of two guys attending weddings with the sole purpose of picking up girls. But seeing the fairly good rating on IMDb, I thought I've give it a try.
Big mistake! The humor was real schoolboy stuff, and I guess they would rate this movie highly for the lingerie and topless shots in the opening 20 minutes or so. Adults will not be so easily pleased. There was very little in the way of witty dialog and and Vaughn's lines were often delivered with such rapidity, most of what he said was incomprehensible. Then Wilson's inordinately nasal delivery served only as a grating counterpoint.
The plot was transparent, but this is not always a handicap. The lack of sub-plots was, though. So too, the unidimensional characterizations for most of the cast, and when combined with lazy - or at best inept - writing, the entire movie became a trial.
Chris Walken was badly underused as he has a true flair for comedic timing and delivery. His scenes were usually the highlight, but near the end his final lines were entirely out of accord with him as a political-minded man.
The real message of the movie delivered by Wilson was as clumsy a piece of writing as you're ever likely to see on film. It hearkens back to the soppy moralizing that used to punctuate many US sitcoms in the 60's and 70's. Of course by this time I was squirming and repeatedly checking my watch for the end of this sorry flick.
Too few paths were trodden as it appears the movie was intended solely as a vehicle for both Wilson and Vaughn. The character "Sack" didn't get his comeuppance and Randolph (the butler) had far more potential to add to each scene he was in and have a greater presence. Will Ferrel was merely grotesque and deserved to be uncredited.
In all, I'm glad I didn't waste a movie ticket to see this, but sorry I blew $10 on the DVD.
Good comedy is hard to find, and I doubt it will ever come with the names of Vaughn or Ferrell.
The Matrix Reloaded (2003)
Rehashed, rather than reloaded
Sequels often struggle to meet the quality of the original, and MR is no exception: in Matrix, Neo completed his journey as a hero, and now he basically has nothing more to achieve: he has mastered both worlds. It is axiomatic that Hollywood will persistently "cash in" on the success of an original by throwing out a sequel and then driving it to success with a huge marketing machine. MR is a prime example of such marketing cynicism.
There is a subplot - the love between Trinity and Neo - but this is underdone and written so clumsily, it only detracts from the main plot, such as it is.
Within the first half hour, the martial arts sequences had well and truly worn out their welcome and Lawrence Fishburn was looking more and more like a schoolchild in a playground emulating Bruce Lee. To increase the insult, the slow-motion clips so beloved of Hollywood (but apparently nowhere else) and done to ridiculous effect in Mission Impossible 2, detract from the apparent skill and inherent excitement of a fight scene. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon offered lessons in how to do such scenes that nobody on MR seemed capable of learning.
The one redeeming aspect of the movie was the chase scene early on, which was exciting, but ultimately unrewarding as the remainder of the movie served up more blandness and cliche.
With interest waning, there was little else to do but pick at the credibility holes in the plot, and since these have probably been done to death by other reviewers, it aids nobody if they're repeated here.
So, without originality, acting that is standard at best, action sequences that are monotonous for the most part, and a plot with gaping holes, it is only the special effects that make the movie worth seeing. But that is not enough to make it worthwhile.
Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002)
Lucas might be able to direct, but he can't write
It is beyond the time that somebody took the pen out of George Lucas' hand and placed it high on a shelf beyond his reach.
Too often in Attack of the Clones, there were actions and dialogue that didn't serve to further the plot, but rather give reason for some event in a "subsequent" piece of the hexology. Too often, this didn't matter to anyone but Lucas. The "subplot" involving Jango Fett is a case in point.
Too often, the actions of the characters were illogical. For example near the end of the movie, when Yoda does his thing with the falling column. Why didn't he just move the people under it? Would that have been too too easy? And if I was Christopher Lee, I'd certainly never miss a chance to take out an opponent while he was otherwise engaged in saving his allies. And where would somebody in the middle of a flat, arid plain on a desert planet go to find mushrooms? The list is extensive, and is a testimony to Lucas' lack of writing skill. It is no surprise that without Campbell's seminal work beside him, the nuances of a workable plot escape him.
Too often, Senator Padme Amidala (obviously demoted from "Queen" and happy about it) switched clothes with a speed no supermodel could hope to emulate, although her choice of garb was at times mystifying: I still wonder at the leather corset she had donned in the evening she spent with Anakin. Surely something a little more concealing and comfortable was in order? And she has a wonderful white jumpsuit that without apparent cause can become a two-piece number that permits her to display a significant amount of midriff. But by this time I'd given up wondering why time had apparently stood still for her, whilst permitting Anakin to put on ten years. At best, this puts him at 18 and her nudging 30...
Too often, moments that should have been filled with warmth and tenderness as the two would-be lovers attempted to make the most of Anakin's personal time warp, were drab and lifeless. Just like much of the dialogue and acting.
The film wasn't without highlights though: the action sequences were handled quite well - clearly this is Lucas' forte. Yoda showed wonderful coordination at one stage, and was that a neon rendering of ET at the front door of a nightclub?
Thank goodness Lucas' seeming obsession with unusual creatures playing weird instruments was held in check by someone. Mind you, nobody seems to drink anything in the Star Wars world unless it is colored blue.
There was so much to irritate in the movie - a situation so aggravated by the length that it's best end simply, and damn it with faint praise: at least it was better than Phantom Menace.